On 2003-07-29 04:25, Nick wrote:
Okay it's not a Graflex but a B&J but at the price I had to grab it. Hopefully it's in good condition when it shows up.

Congratualtions! And if you're nice, we'll let you stay here
Don't feel bad about it being "not a Graflex". A lot of the other camneras are just fine. I almost bought a different brand as my first, but graflex.org convinced me to go for a Speed. I didn't even shop around much. Major big forst investment, but to this day it's still my best and most used camera, so it turned out well worth it.
Next thing to wonder about is who made the B&J press camera? I don't think they manufactured anything themselves? Or am I wrong? I've been wondering the same thing about my B&J Commercial View. That's what I like about graflex.org and Graflex. It takes care of most of those wonderings

_________________----------------------------------------
"Ya just can't have too many GVIIs"
----------------------------------------

Kind of hard to find much hard info on B&J stuff. I just wanted a camera easier to haul then my rail camera. The B&J and tripod should be lighter then just my View I -)

The camera supposedly has more movements then some of the Graflex models but only a spring back.

The seller is including a 2.5x3.5" back but from looking at the pictures I'm having trouble with the idea it fits the 4x5 somehow.

In a funny way it's a bit of closure. Long ago I got outbid on a B&J complete setup. Camera,case,flash,holders,dark cloth, you name it. In a way I always kicked myself for that. Now I can see what I missed out on.

On 2003-07-29 12:31, Nick wrote:
Kind of hard to find much hard info on B&J stuff. I just wanted a camera easier to haul then my rail camera. The B&J and tripod should be lighter then just my View I -)

The camera supposedly has more movements then some of the Graflex models but only a spring back.

The seller is including a 2.5x3.5" back but from looking at the pictures I'm having trouble with the idea it fits the 4x5 somehow.

In a funny way it's a bit of closure. Long ago I got outbid on a B&J complete setup. Camera,case,flash,holders,dark cloth, you name it. In a way I always kicked myself for that. Now I can see what I missed out on.

I think the View I would be a great field camera. But may be a bit heavy? Mine is in no shape for use, so I would be "stuck" with a View II and do plan on taking it out soon. No light kit though...

So, this camera has interchangable backs? I'd like to see it. Unless it's the 4x5 View? Hmmm, yep, I'd like to see it I hope it does fit a 4x5 and you can find one!

I can sympathize with your buying rational. I've bought several items for the same reason. And I'm not so sure there was much 'reason' involved either

_________________----------------------------------------
"Ya just can't have too many GVIIs"
----------------------------------------

I think the View I would be a great field camera. But may be a bit heavy? Mine is in no shape for use, so I would be "stuck" with a View II and do plan on taking it out soon. No light kit though...

So, this camera has interchangable backs? I'd like to see it. Unless it's the 4x5 View? Hmmm, yep, I'd like to see it I hope it does fit a 4x5 and you can find one!

I can sympathize with your buying rational. I've bought several items for the same reason. And I'm not so sure there was much 'reason' involved either

The problem with the monorails is the rail. At least with the View I can take it off the rail and that helps but the Calumet I have can't come off the rail. The weight is easier to deal with then the shape.

I don't think the B&J can take the other back. Supposedly the seller got it all at an estate sale. Now I usually don't bid on sales like that but the seller came across very honest. The ad was confusing until I figured out what the ad called a "lens" was the ground glass. Once I got them to open the front they found the real lens. A linhof Xenar. I think a 135mm. That's too short but I've got a 150 that should be perfect for this camera.

From the little bit of info I've been able to find on the camera I'd say it's like a pre-aniversy Crown but with a revolving back and better movements.

Okay, I see it, and it doesn't help a bit
There's another option that may not have crossed your mind. It may be a 3x4, not 4x5. That sure wouldn't help any. Looks like an interesting camera though. I hope it's 4x5 too! And you're right. I don't see how that small back/holder could fit that camera?
As far as the lens, I guess there's a difference in users. I prefer a 127, then a 135 and don't like 150 at all. Always prefered a wide-normal. Ans a 135 isn't bad at all.
Good luck with it and let us know what format it turns out to be!

_________________----------------------------------------
"Ya just can't have too many GVIIs"
----------------------------------------

I don't know who actually mfd. the cameras, but the "B&J Speed Press Camera" was sold by Burke and James, Inc, in Chicago, Illinois. In an old 1951 Popular Photography I have, the 4X5 camera sold for $84.50 less lens. Fred.

As far as the lens, I guess there's a difference in users. I prefer a 127, then a 135 and don't like 150 at all. Always prefered a wide-normal. Ans a 135 isn't bad at all.
Good luck with it and let us know what format it turns out to be!

The problem with this 135mm is it will barely cover the 4x5 negative. Use any movements and it's an oops. The 150mm will do better. Plus it gives me an excuse to look for a better 150mm for the other camera-)))

On 2003-07-30 04:49, Nick wrote:
The problem with this 135mm is it will barely cover the 4x5 negative. Use any movements and it's an oops. The 150mm will do better. Plus it gives me an excuse to look for a better 150mm for the other camera-)))

You've got a good point, and a good excuse
I have a 152mm (Ektar I think) on a View II and do like it, but still prefer a wider lens for 'normal'. Although there was a reason a while back why I wanted to pick up another 152? Never did though as I got involved with the 8x10 and lenses for that. Plus I finally got a 75mm for the View II since I couldn't mount my 65mm for use on that.
I doubt I'll need another 152 now since I bought a 153 for the 8x10 which doesn't quite cover. It's old, but would make a great 4x5 lens as it has a good 9 inch circle.
I've said more than once that I was done buying LF gear I wish I was... But I still need a 120mm for the 8x10, would love to find a wider than 65mm for the 4x5, still searching for a 500mm+ tele for 4x5 and am now wondering if something longer than 30 inches exists in tele for the 8x10? And then something always pops up that I just 'need'... The only problem (besides money) is that I get so wrapped up in the equipment that I don't actually go out and use it... It really is time to stop buying and start using...

_________________----------------------------------------
"Ya just can't have too many GVIIs"
----------------------------------------

If I ever find a cheap 8x10 one of my 210mm process lenses will get used on it. Both lenses have plenty of coverage. I can't see myself wanting wider. The widest lens on the 4x5 is a 105mm. I'd love a 120 but for 4x5 use.

The 150mm for 4x5 tend to be reasonable even the newer ones. So I might invest in a nice modern lens.

I doubt you'll find a real long tele lens. Most of the long lenses I've seen are really old process lenses.

"Standard" lens are often cheaper, but not always... I almost bought a 165 for the 8x10 thinking it would be a great 4x5 lens also. But then I realized that I'd never use it on the 4x5. Luckily, the 120 can have happy dual use. There are a lot of 150s around. But finding a good one at a good price should be fun.
My objective in a wide lens is 90 degree coverage (or better) to catch 3 walls in a room. Or very wide landscapes...
I have seen a 1000mm tele, but it either didn't have a shutter or was beyond my means. Have no idea what coverage it offered either. It's not high on my priority list. Don't know why, but I can shoot a 500mm hand held with 35mm but a ~400mm on a 4x5 or 8x10 shakes like crazy on a tripod... Right now I go to 380mm for 4x5 and 28inch (711mm) on the 8x10. It's enough to make me happy.
What I'd really like to have is a 3inch to 60 inch f/2.8 zoom with 8x10 coverage. Just can't imagine why noone ever produced it?

_________________----------------------------------------
"Ya just can't have too many GVIIs"
----------------------------------------

"...am now wondering if something longer than 30 inches exists in tele for the 8x10?"

Well there was. Both B&L and Goerz made tele-adapters for their prime lenses. A friend of mine has a 12" Tele-tessar. That's a 12" Tessar with an 8x zoom tele-adapter, for a total of 96" focal lenght that focuses very well on an 8x10 Deardorff.

The lens is long--bout like a 300mm 2.8 Nikkor. We've never really figured out how good or bad the lens is It seems that not matter how well you stabilize the camera (angle iron, second tripod) this focal lenght tends to pick up on any odd vibration---passing cars, jet planes at 30,000 feet, lunar tides, geologic crystal vibrations, you name it. It's also not exactly a fast lens at f90 (8 stops off of 4.5)